World journal of urology · 2018
Comparison of electrohydraulic and electromagnetic extracorporeal shock wave lithotriptors for upper urinary tract stones in a single center.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lee Chih-Chiao, Lin Wun-Rong, Hsu Jong-Ming, Chow Yung-Chiong, Tsai Wei-Kung, Chiang Pai-Kai, Chen Marcelo, Chiu Allen W
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and outcomes of shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) for upper urinary tract stones with an electrohydraulic (EH) and an electromagnetic (EM) lithotriptor in a single center.
METHODS: The medical records of 272 patients with upper urinary tract stones ≤ 2 cm in size who underwent SWL with either the Medispec E3000 EH lithotriptor (179 cases) or the Medispec EM1000 EM lithotriptor (93 cases) were reviewed. The demographic data, stone parameters, stone-free rates, and retreatment rates were analyzed.
RESULTS: The EH group had a higher stone-free rate (53.6 vs. 30.1%, p < 0.001) and a lower retreatment rate (32.4 vs. 61.2%, p < 0.001) for renal and upper third ureteral stones than the EM group. The stone-free rates for renal stones < 1 cm (55.5 vs. 32.2%, p = 0.045), ureteral stones < 1 cm (64.5 vs. 42.1%, p = 0.028), and renal stones ≥ 1 cm (43.1 vs. 0%, p = 0.03) were higher in the EH group. Two patients in the EH group had a renal hematoma needing hospitalization after SWL. There were no complications in the EM group.
CONCLUSIONS: The Medispec E3000 EH lithotriptor had higher stone-free rates and lower retreatment rates than the Medispec EM1000 EM lithotriptor for renal stones < 2 cm and ureteral stones < 1 cm. Complications were rare.
METHODS: The medical records of 272 patients with upper urinary tract stones ≤ 2 cm in size who underwent SWL with either the Medispec E3000 EH lithotriptor (179 cases) or the Medispec EM1000 EM lithotriptor (93 cases) were reviewed. The demographic data, stone parameters, stone-free rates, and retreatment rates were analyzed.
RESULTS: The EH group had a higher stone-free rate (53.6 vs. 30.1%, p < 0.001) and a lower retreatment rate (32.4 vs. 61.2%, p < 0.001) for renal and upper third ureteral stones than the EM group. The stone-free rates for renal stones < 1 cm (55.5 vs. 32.2%, p = 0.045), ureteral stones < 1 cm (64.5 vs. 42.1%, p = 0.028), and renal stones ≥ 1 cm (43.1 vs. 0%, p = 0.03) were higher in the EH group. Two patients in the EH group had a renal hematoma needing hospitalization after SWL. There were no complications in the EM group.
CONCLUSIONS: The Medispec E3000 EH lithotriptor had higher stone-free rates and lower retreatment rates than the Medispec EM1000 EM lithotriptor for renal stones < 2 cm and ureteral stones < 1 cm. Complications were rare.